Passengers' nudity to be blurred on full-body scanners

When the new full body scanners were introduced at airports across the world, there was outcry from passengers about the 'naked' image taken by the machine.

But now, the US claims it has found the answer for modest travellers who want to maintain their privacy.

The US Transportation Security Administration has approved plans to upgrade its full body scanners, which will eliminate the naked image that appears on the operator's screen. Instead it will be replaced with a computer-generated outline or silhouette.

Modesty: The new scanners will hide the passenger's naked image

Suspicious objects will still be visible on the outline to ensure the security procedure is not compromised.

TSA administrator John Pistole said: ‘This software upgrade enables us to continue providing a high level of security through advanced imaging technology screening, while improving the passenger experience at check points.’

The controversial devices have raised privacy concerns because they allow authorities to see underneath clothing to skin, although special software normally masks some parts of the body.

The £80,000 scanners, which are also used in the UK, produce ‘naked’ images of passengers and prevent the need for manual pat down searches.

Share this article

Share

In March, two women were stopped from boarding a plane at Manchester Airport after refusing to undergo a scan. The passengers, due to fly to Islamabad, were selected at random to go through the new scanning machine.

Airports in Dubai also refused full-body scanners as part of their border security regime because the devices do not correspond with national customs and ethics.

Brig Ahmed bin Thani, the Dubai Police’s director of airport security: ‘I do not feel that it is necessary for us to implement such a technology while we are operating different methods and have different avenues that have worked so far.

‘The use of such a device violates personal privacy and it raises a very sensitive issue for passengers, in addition to the fact that it does not complement our national ethics.’